See, I didn't get that from Dabe's post. I think that she was merely trying to put a human face on this debacle

That is exactly true. And, the more human we make it, the more I'd hope that people will not so readily take up arms, particularly for a questionable endeavor. I hope that if people see the horrors of war, they won't be so cavalier about advocating its questionable merits. War is hell.

But do they WANT it? Do they want to become westernized? Isn't it wrong of us to go around flexing our arm and forcing our way of life upon people who may not want it?

If it wasn't this country, it would be another. There's always going to be conflict, I understand that. However, I'd rather it was a conflict for honest humanitarian reasons, not a commercial interest masquerading as something else.

The question isn't "Do they want it?" The question is "Is it in our interest?" With respect to IRAQ, the answer to both is NO. This isn't an oil issue, and to say it is reflect an incredible ignorance of the liberal neocon mind. The liberals on the left, and the neoconservative liberals (yes, they are liberals at heart) both believe in the Tabula Rasa theory and that all people are fundamentally the same at heart. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Mohammedans aren't "just like us."

Democracy is not a panacea to all the worlds ills. In degenerate societies, it becomes ochlocracy and legitimizes evils.

With respect to the insurgency in Iraq, it is indeed mostly Iraqi. The Iraqis weren't soundly defeated in battle in a manner like the Germans were in WWII, and thus were allowed to melt away into the general population. The Fedayeen Saddam were approximately 20-40,000 strong before the war, and were recruited from Sunni areas loyal to Saddam. Does anyone remember the US military killing 20-40,000 Fedayeen? Of course not. They're still out there. I suspect they form the backbone of the insurgent groups across Sunni Iraq, with the exception of Zarqawi's group.

All policy with respect to Iraq was due to cause terrorism. The status quo was sanctions, and the communist organizations around the world routinely created propaganda that claimed that American sanctions killed millions of Iraqi children. Islamic groups exploited this propaganda. It is this issue which contributed to September 11. Without those sanctions, however, Iraq would actually have had a working and highly advanced WMD program. This is a quandry which neither liberals nor neocons ever seem to talk about.

Had Chimp-In-Chief not deified democracy and touted it as the savior of the world, America may have had a more realistic policy at work. First thing everyone needs to accept: the Mohammedans are NOT LIKE US. They are desirable neither as friends nor as foes. If the world ever wants peace, all non-Mohammedans must recognize that apartheid approach is the only one possible. Completely segregate the Mohammedan world from the rest, and this includes all those who live among us--native born or not. They must be removed. This is certainly preferable to the other two options. Forced conversions or total genocide. I don't think anyone has the stomach or ability to do that.

This would require that we discard perhaps our biggest vice--mindless tolerance--and replace it with prudence discrimination.

But do they WANT it? Do they want to become westernized? Isn't it wrong of us to go around flexing our arm and forcing our way of life upon people who may not want it?

If it wasn't this country, it would be another. There's always going to be conflict, I understand that. However, I'd rather it was a conflict for honest humanitarian reasons, not a commercial interest masquerading as something else.

The question isn't "Do they want it?" The question is "Is it in our interest?" With respect to IRAQ, the answer to both is NO. This isn't an oil issue, and to say it is reflect an incredible ignorance of the liberal neocon mind. The liberals on the left, and the neoconservative liberals (yes, they are liberals at heart) both believe in the Tabula Rasa theory and that all people are fundamentally the same at heart. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Mohammedans aren't "just like us."

Democracy is not a panacea to all the worlds ills. In degenerate societies, it becomes ochlocracy and legitimizes evils.

With respect to the insurgency in Iraq, it is indeed mostly Iraqi. The Iraqis weren't soundly defeated in battle in a manner like the Germans were in WWII, and thus were allowed to melt away into the general population. The Fedayeen Saddam were approximately 20-40,000 strong before the war, and were recruited from Sunni areas loyal to Saddam. Does anyone remember the US military killing 20-40,000 Fedayeen? Of course not. They're still out there. I suspect they form the backbone of the insurgent groups across Sunni Iraq, with the exception of Zarqawi's group.

All policy with respect to Iraq was due to cause terrorism. The status quo was sanctions, and the communist organizations around the world routinely created propaganda that claimed that American sanctions killed millions of Iraqi children. Islamic groups exploited this propaganda. It is this issue which contributed to September 11. Without those sanctions, however, Iraq would actually have had a working and highly advanced WMD program. This is a quandry which neither liberals nor neocons ever seem to talk about.

Had Chimp-In-Chief not deified democracy and touted it as the savior of the world, America may have had a more realistic policy at work. First thing everyone needs to accept: the Mohammedans are NOT LIKE US. They are desirable neither as friends nor as foes. If the world ever wants peace, all non-Mohammedans must recognize that apartheid approach is the only one possible. Completely segregate the Mohammedan world from the rest, and this includes all those who live among us--native born or not. They must be removed. This is certainly preferable to the other two options. Forced conversions or total genocide. I don't think anyone has the stomach or ability to do that.

This would require that we discard perhaps our biggest vice--mindless tolerance--and replace it with prudent discrimination.

You cavalierly parade these images on your site, hoping to elicit an emotional reaction.

I do not cavalierly do anything. And most importantly, I don't advocate cavalierly sending our men and women to another country to preemptively attack, kill their men and women and children, all for some dubious WMD's that never existed, intelligence that was ignored, and not a threat to this country. It had nothing to do with the defense of this country. And, I do not cavalierly take money intended for the Afghanistan conflict, without any Congressional approvals, and start a bombing campaign months before any declaration of war or approval of Congress was ever made.

If you take issue with cavalier attitudes, I suggest you write the dubya dummy a letter. Take it up with him.

Dharma, a human face is not a bad thing. One of the reasons I prefer the CNN tribute pages is that they include a photo and personal information about the man or woman who has died. What they liked, disliked, their dreams, goals and asperations. Whether they were married, single, loved ones left behind. That is a much more personal face on their tragic deaths than the bloodfest Dabe gets off on.

If it was just this post, I would agree with you, but Dabe has shown nothing but contempt for the military or its members, I refuse to accept even the most remote use of our brave men and women for her sickness... even if she tries to put a legitimate anti war face on her depravity.

If you want to get to know some of these heroes in a more person way than 2,111 killed in Iraq and Afghanistan, I invite you to read about them here Link They include quotes from the families who are against the war, for the war, were just doing their jobs and otherwise expressed no opinion either way. This site (and the research I've been doing that brings me back to it time and time again) is responsible for more than one night finding me crying myself to sleep... if I can sleep at all.
Learning who they were, to me, is much more productive and informative than seeing their eviscerated intestines on the internet. It is also much more respectful towards the fallen, and the families and loved ones they left behind.

P.S. I reacted very emotionally to these pictures, and ask that the good people here at JU respect my reaction, I in turn also respect the emotional reactions that others had... along with the thoughts and feelings on this war that were conveyed, whether I agree with the stance on the war that motivated them or not.

Depravity is sending people to war for no good reason. There is nothing more depraved than that. Except of course, cheering on the depraved war effort.

ParaTed, I am sorry you were so emotionally upset by the images. I did post a very strong warning about graphic violent images. But again, my point was not to disrespect anyone. It was to emphasize the horrors of war to those who otherwise have this gung-ho, kill the towelheads attitude. And, I wanted to show that even the "towelheads" are human. They have families. children and fathers and mothers and brothers and sisters. The images weren't just American soldiers. They did not discriminate. War does not discriminate. People die. They die horrific violent deaths. That is what war is.

I sometimes think that we sit in front of our TV's and see all kinds of violence, be it war, or murders, or whatever. As a society, I think we have become desensitized to the horrors of war and violence. Putting real human faces in real tragic events hopefully wakes people up to the cruelty, the absolute human waste that war is. Not to mention the complete waste of all kinds of resources; resources that can never be recovered. Gone forever.

I am sorry that you were offended. I really am. Was it my intention to offend? No. Was it my intention to show the reality? Yes. Do I hope the images have a lasting effect on how some of you view the war? Absolutely. But I do it because I care.

Democracy is not a panacea to all the worlds ills. In degenerate societies, it becomes ochlocracy and legitimizes evils.

EXACTLY!!!!!!

Dabe has shown nothing but contempt for the military or its members, I refuse to accept even the most remote use of our brave men and women for her sickness... even if she tries to put a legitimate anti war face on her depravity.

I'm sorry you feel that way. Personally, I don't agree.

I'm sorry that you were offended by her post.

ParaTed, I am sorry you were so emotionally upset by the images. I did post a very strong warning about graphic violent images. But again, my point was not to disrespect anyone. It was to emphasize the horrors of war to those who otherwise have this gung-ho, kill the towelheads attitude. And, I wanted to show that even the "towelheads" are human. They have families. children and fathers and mothers and brothers and sisters. The images weren't just American soldiers. They did not discriminate. War does not discriminate. People die. They die horrific violent deaths. That is what war is.

Sometimes an obituary just isn't enough. The military city page you linked to, Ted, is basically a mass obituary page...and again, we have become desensitized to words and pretty pictures of people. Sometimes we need a smack in the face to wake us up. I think that that was Dabe's intention with this article....and she DID post a warning on it.

Dabe, it was not the images that offended me, or caused my emotional reaction, unfortunatly for me, I'm far beyond the point where mere photos shakes me. What offended me was that you used these images as ammunition in your anti war stance. Did, I over react, Yes, and let me publicly apologize for the crass, hurtful and inhumane things I accused you of. My intention was to hurt you and that was patently unfair to you. Just know that there is nothing about war mangled bodies that I take lightly or impersonally... of either side.

I do not relish in the deaths of anyone, all to often though, I see both war hawks and anti war doves looking on death and dismemberment as a scoreboard for their particular side of the issue. That (to me) is more sick than the pictures you showed.

So, at this point, I'm willing to accept your apology and hope you accept mine... then we can go back to the healthy and happy lack of tact we enjoy between us as we agree to disagree on issues and just plain agree on other facets of life. ;~D

Dharma, please read deeper in the articles then. There are some that are merely the official announcement, others are as you say "a mass obituary" but many include very personal details of the person's life. Thanks for trying anyway.

Dharma, please read deeper in the articles then. There are some that are merely the official announcement, others are as you say "a mass obituary" but many include very personal details of the person's life. Thanks for trying anyway.

Ted, I read obits every day that have very personal details of a person's life included in them....like their favorite color, what they liked to eat and read, what their personal beliefs were...testaments from their friends and family, their employers/employees, coaches, teachers etc. An obituary isn't just a death notice, most of them these days are incredibly detailed and personal.

Seems to me that the two of you are trying to do the same thing, just in different ways.

Dharma

Seems to me that the two of you are trying to do the same thing, just in different ways.

That's a good place to end it, so with my thanks, I'll bow out of the discussion and hope everyone the best.

So, at this point, I'm willing to accept your apology and hope you accept mine... then we can go back to the healthy and happy lack of tact we enjoy between us as we agree to disagree on issues and just plain agree on other facets of life. ;~D

I had to laugh at this statement. It was/is funny, fun, heartwarming and sincere. Thank you, ParaTed. We'll now continue the business of friendly disagreement. Thank you.